Hill v Lloyds Bank Plc (DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION) [2020] UKEAT 0173_19_0603 (06 March 2020)

Hill v Lloyds Bank Plc (DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION) [2020] UKEAT 0173_19_0603 (06 March 2020)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the respondent's practice of not giving written undertakings placed the disabled claimant at a substantial disadvantage, and that providing such an undertaking was a reasonable adjustment. There is no objection in principle to recommendations requiring undertakings with financial implications, and the ET's revocation of the recommendation was flawed. The issues of recommendation and anonymisation are remitted for reconsideration.

Citation
[2020] UKEAT 0173_19_0603
Parties
Claimant: Mrs S Hill; Respondent: Lloyds Bank Plc
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal and Remittal
Outcome
Appeals allowed in relation to recommendation, reconsideration decision, and anonymity; all other grounds dismissed.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Adjustments, Recommendations, Anonymity in Judgments
Employment Law Equality Law Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments Recommendations Anonymity in Judgments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs S Hill

Claimant

Lloyds Bank Plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal and Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments for a disabled employee
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's practice constituted a provision, criterion or practice (PCP)
  3. 3 Whether the PCP placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled persons

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the respondent's practice of not giving written undertakings placed the disabled claimant at a substantial disadvantage, and that providing such an undertaking was a reasonable adjustment. There is no objection in principle to recommendations requiring undertakings with financial implications, and the ET's revocation of the recommendation was flawed. The issues of recommendation and anonymisation are remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in relation to recommendation, reconsideration decision, and anonymity; all other grounds dismissed.

Orders

  • Remit the issues of recommendation and anonymisation to the Employment Tribunal for reconsideration.
  • Assessment of compensation for injury to feelings (£7,500.00) upheld.